One argument — and nine centuries of argument about it. Anselm claims that pure logic, with no evidence and no experience, can prove that God exists. Gaunilo, Kant and Barth answer.
Can God's existence be proved by definition alone — and if the proof fails, is the argument worthless?
Every debate in this unit lines up on the same axis — from an idea that exists in the mind only to a being that exists in reality, necessarily. The whole argument is an attempt to cross that line by logic alone. Pick a lesson, then tap a position to see what it claims and where it's strong or weak.
Tap a circle — or use Tab and Enter — to explore each position.
Top answers don't treat the three lessons separately. Three ideas run through all of them — spot the thread and you're writing at the top of the mark scheme.
In intellectu vs in re. Anselm claims a definition can cross the gap; Gaunilo and Kant insist nothing crosses it but experience.
Kant's whole verdict in two letters: IF there is a God, God exists necessarily. Every stage of the unit either hides that 'if' or points at it.
'Is it a proof?' and 'is it worth anything?' are different questions. Keep them apart — that is where Barth, fideism and Price live.
The unit splits into three lessons. They look different, but each is really asking whether logic alone can reach reality.
Everything for the unit, in one place. Open a lesson's deck, booklet and podcast, and use the Philosopher Companion across all three.
LINKS list near the bottom, and paste each SharePoint share link once. Buttons with no link show as “Link not set”.
Use your resources in this order. The Philosopher Companion is where you learn to plan both question types.
One podcast per lesson — a teacher and student talk each move through to a judgement. Annotate as you listen.
Read the given text, write the key claims in your own words, then decide the strength and weakness you'd give each view.
In the Companion: match each term to its meaning, then use it in a sentence. RAG-rate the mastery checklist with the three faces.
Use the Companion frameworks and the guidance-left / your-turn-right scaffolds. Never evaluate what you haven't first explained.
A full review of The Ontological Argument — Anselm and Gaunilo, Kant's two objections, and the proof-and-value debate. Best watched before you start revising, then again to check your recall.
Teacher: paste the YouTube link in the VIDEO_URL line near the bottom of this file. The player then appears here automatically.
Flip a card to check yourself. Switch between key terms (term → meaning) and views (position → claim, strength & weakness), and filter by lesson.